Judge delays decision on eagle's status

Kate Nolan The Arizona Republic Feb. 6, 2008 12:00 AM

Calling the fate of Arizona's eagles "an important issue for our district and the United States," a federal judge in Phoenix postponed a decision Tuesday about protections for the state's desert-nesting bald eagles.

Arizona's small band of raptors was removed from endangered-species protections in August along with the nation's other 11,000 bald eagles in the lower 48 states.

The action to include Arizona eagles was protested by Gov. Janet Napolitano, U.S. Reps. Harry Mitchell and Raul Grijalva, all three Democrats, along with conservation groups and Indian tribes.

In a courtroom filled with more than 75 tribal leaders and members of the public, lawyers for the Center for Biological Diversity and Maricopa Audubon, the groups that filed the lawsuit, asked that the Arizona birds be put back on the endangered-species list, at least until their status can be reviewed by wildlife officials.

Lawyers for the Salt River Pima-Maricopa Indian Community, the San Carlos Apache Tribe, Yavapai-Apache Nation and Tonto Apache Tribe also spoke at the hearing, arguing that the state's bald eagles are more fragile than government authorities say.

The tribes last week filed "friend of the court" briefs, claiming federal authorities overlooked the cultural significance of Arizona eagles, and that they breeched federal laws requiring appropriate consultation with tribes before a delisting decision.

Dan Rohlf, a lawyer for the environmentalists, charged that federal authorities did not follow protocol and ignored key evidence in deciding against a 2004 petition to have the Arizona's eagles designated as a distinct population that makes a unique contribution to the survival of the species. The Endangered Species Act protects distinct populations.

Telling the court the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service had "written desert eagles off," Rohlf said the agency ignored evidence they are distinct from other eagles and had directed biologists to make their findings support a decision to delist the eagles. The result, he said, was a negative "90-day finding" on the 2004 petition, which actually took more than a year to reach.

Asked by Murguia to account for the sluggish pace and the appearance that higher-ups at Fish and Wildlife had demanded a negative finding, government attorney Lisa Lynne Russell said economic factors restrained the agency from pursuing endangered-species actions unless they are court ordered.

Russell said Washington administrators routinely speak stridently to field biologists to ensure "that decisions are made in a uniform way."

"It's much less sinister than how the plaintiffs have interpreted it," she said.

Russell agreed a statement regarding all eagles in the Federal Register was "not the best way to solicit comment on whether Arizona eagles should stay on the list as a distinct population segment," referencing complaints the tribes had not been notified.

Meanwhile, an estimated 45 eagle pairs are breeding in Arizona this winter, monitored by the Southwestern Bald Eagle Management Committee. That collaboration of government, business and tribal groups grew out of a 1970s program started by Maricopa Audubon and the U.S. Forest Service.